a salutary effect on world opinion. Rather than a sign of weakness, passage of the bill would prove that at the very time that we are building up our armed strength to meet the demands of justice that Berlin imposes on us and the free world, we give strong evidence of our interest in seeking an end to the arms race. Passage of the bill would provide an excellent complement to the President's speech on Berlin and to our present arms buildup. In our concern over Berlin, we must not lose sight of the long-range advantage in world public opinion that would accrue to the United States if we passed the bill creating the Disarmament Agency within the next month.

NEED FOR INFORMING AMERICAN PUBLIC ON PROBLEM OF ARMS CONTROL

We should like to emphasize one final point that was made in the article by Mrs. Herzfeld quoted above:

We have never sought to inform the U.S. public

she said

on the meaning of arms, the meaning of arms control and the degree of our own national sovereignty which would have to be given up for an enforceable system of inspection and control.

At that point I might just interject here that this statement made by Mrs. Herzfeld, I think, is still true despite the really noble efforts that your Subcommittee on Disarmament made over the past few

years.

Senator HUMPHREY. We were just like a drop of water in a mighty ocean, compared to what is needed; you know that. It was a very small beginning.

Mr. NAGLE. I am inclined to agree.

As a nongovernmental organization in the international field, the Catholic Association for International Peace realizes its responsibility in informing American public opinion, but the major work in this formation of opinion on the problem of arms control must come from the President and members of Congress, particularly those whose committee assignments involve them in arms control and related

matters.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

SUPPORT FOR S. 2180

Senator HUMPHREY. I want to thank you very much, Mr. Nagle. I do not believe there is any need to ask any questions. You do support this measure as it is before us?

Mr. NAGLE. Completely and fully.

Senator HUMPHREY. Is your association broadly representative of the people of the Catholic faith?

Mr. NAGLE. It certainly is broadly representative, Mr. Chairman, of Catholics throughout the country, especially those in universities who are professionals in the field of international relations. I think I can say it is broadly representative of certainly the most enlightened Catholic thinking in the United States on international matters.

Senator HUMPHREY. I shall have to recess momentarily while I go to the Senate floor for a vote.

(A short recess was taken.)

Senator HUMPHREY. All right. Thank you for waiting.
Mr. Sandford Persons is our next witness.

STATEMENT OF SANDFORD Z. PERSONS, LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, UNITED WORLD FEDERALISTS, WASHINGTON, D.C.

Senator HUMPHREY. Sandy, how are you? You are legislative director of the United World Federalists?

Mr. PERSONS. That is right, Senator. I am testifying on behalf of our president, Mr. Paul W. Walter, who is in Hawaii and regrets very much his inability to be here.

In the interest of time, I would like to ask that the statement be presented as if read.

Senator HUMPHREY. It certainly will.

IMPACT OF DISARMAMENT ON U.S. ECONOMY

I would like to ask you one question. Do you recall the testimony this morning of Mr. Thomas? Were you present when he made some suggestions as to a fifth point in the statement of purposes?

Mr. PERSONS. I am afraid it is not clear in my mind.

Senator HUMPHREY. What he was emphasizing was to include as one of the main purposes of the bill the matter of economic research and the impact of disarmament on the economy. Do you feel this is a vital part of this proposed activity?

Mr. PERSONS. I recall it now. We certainly do. We have felt it so important a matter in terms of the whole psychology of America's approach to the disarmament question, in terms of getting rid of this possible roadblock to people's thinking, that it has been part of our thinking for a long time, Senator.

ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE PROPOSED IN S. 2180

Senator HUMPHREY. What is the view of your organization with reference to the administrative structure proposed in this bill?

Mr. PERSONS. We have looked at it with considerable care. Mr. Walter is an attorney-was an attorney-in Ohio, and a longtime associate of Senator Taft. We feel that it is excellent. It is unique in regard to the relationship of the Director both to the Secretary of State and the President. It is important in terms of the unique relationship this must have, in terms of cutting across lines of other agencies, and we feel that it is important in relationship to the interest of the President himself, that this is a satisfactory solution to the problem.

We think Mr. John McCloy and the staff have done an excellent job of creating this bill, and I would just like to pay tribute on behalf of our organization to Mr. McCloy and his staff's work over these past 5 months.

Senator HUMPHREY. Is your membership familiar with the details of this bill?

Mr. PERSONS. We have been with it since you introduced it here, and Dr. Morgan did in the House. We have made not one but two mail

ings to our members across the country. We are checking on it by mail, and so on.

Senator HUMPHREY. Excellent. Thank you very much for your statement today which will be printed in full.

Mr. PERSONS. Attached to our statement was an excerpt from a speech by Senator Taft on the floor of the Senate on July 11, 1949. We deemed it to be pertinent, and I ask that it be included in the printing.

Senator HUMPHREY. Indeed, it will. We shall make special note of that.

Mr. PERSONS. Thank you, sir.

(Mr. Walter's prepared statement, together with the attachment, follows:)

STATEMENT OF PAUL W. WALTER, PRESIDENT, UNITED WORLD FEDERALISTS, INC.

United World Federalists was born of the concern which millions of citizens felt at the advent of the nuclear age signaled by the mushroom cloud above Hiroshima. As a citizens' organization of such origin it has been deeply concerned with the urgent problem of disarmament and with the inadequate study, preparation for negotiations, and priority given by our Government to this complex matter. We have consistently maintained that disarmament alone, even total disarmament, cannot achieve world peace. Secure and viable peace will require world legal institutions to insure the equitable enforcement of disarmament and to provide impartial and just machinery for the settlement of international disputes.

We believe that the requirements for sale and stable disarmament were well set forth by former Secretary of State Christian A. Herter in his address to the National Press Club on February 18, 1960, when he said:

"To assure a world of peaceful change, we should project a second stage of general disarmament. Our objective in this second stage should be twofold:

"First, to create certain universally accepted rules of law which, if followed, would prevent all nations from attacking other nations. Such rules of law should be backed by a world court and by effective means of enforcement, that is, by international armed force.

"Second, to reduce national armed forces, under safeguarded and verified arrangements, to the point where no single nation or group of nations could effectively oppose this enforcement of international law by international machinery."

Secretary Herter further indicated that the United States was "ready now to take part in appropriate studies to this end." He said: "These studies could focus on two types of basic and needed change: "First, the strengthening and development of international instruments to prevent national aggression in a world that has been disarmed, except for internal security forces.

"Second, the strengthening and development of international machinery to insure just and peaceful settlement of disputed issues in a disarmed world.

"Progress along both these basic lines will be needed if the goal of general disarmament is to be fulfilled."

We realize that the problems of achieving disarmament and the international machinery proposed by Secretary Herter are enormously important and complex. We firmly believe, however, that the future of our country, of freedom, perhaps of humanity itself, depends on coming up with the right answers.

It is for this reason that we strongly support the creation of thẹ U.S. Disarmament Agency for World Peace and Security proposed in S. 2180. We believe that problems of this magnitude of importance should be dealt with by a permanent agency charged with responsibility in this field and staffed by the most capable persons who can be found having expertness in the many fields involved. We believe it important that this staff be given status and remuneration such that our Government will have a body of trained and experienced personnel in this field. The relatively modest sums and staff contemplated for the Agency here proposed are a small price to pay for adequate study and preparation in an area of such vital importance to our national security and to world peace.

We are impressed by the statement of "purpose" contained in S. 2180: "An ultimate goal of the United States is a world which is free from the scourge of war and the dangers and burdens of armaments, in which the use of force has been subordinated to the rule of law, and in which international adjustments to a changing world are achieved peacefully." We are also impressed by the commendable scope of the 13 areas of study and research set forth under title III, section 31. Studies under item (e), "the structure and operation of international control and other organizations useful for disarmament," are clearly necessary in pursuit of Secretary Herter's objectives. We would hope that careful consideration will be given to ways in which the United Nations can be strengthened to fulfill the responsibilities entailed in universal, enforcible disarmament under law down to levels required for internal policing.

We support the creation of the proposed Agency not only in the belief that it will better equip our country for international negotiations but in the high hope that its work will enable our country to take the initiative in this vital field involving the hopes of millions of the world's peoples. We believe that our ability to seize the initiative for disarmament and a world rule of law will play a major part in our ability to win the ideological battle with the Communist world. It is our belief that the semiautonomous nature of the proposed Agency provides sufficient independence from agencies charged with other tasks to enable it to function independently of them under the direction of the President and the Secretary of State. We believe it has been provided with adequate channels for liaison with other agencies. In particular, we feel that it is wise to create this Agency by act of Congress in order to give it the stature necessary to grapple with the immense problems with which it must deal.

Recognizing that problems and crises will always be with us, we hold that the time to create this new Agency is now. It will be of immense value to our President and our Ambassador to the United Nations during the coming U.N. General Assembly to be able to point to this Agency, which will be the first of its kind created by any nation, as an earnest endeavor of our firm determination to achieve safe and controlled disarmament. Moreover, it seems probable that

disarmament negotiations will be resumed in the near future, and it is important that more adequate staff be promptly assembled in support of these negotiations.

We look forward to the day when, as President Kennedy said in his letter of transmittal to Vice President Johnson, we can enjoy "a peaceful world society in which disarmament, except for the forces needed to apply international sanctions, is the accepted condition of international life."

We strongly urge passage of this bill during the current session of Congress.

EXCERPTS FROM A SPEECH BY THE LATE SENATOR ROBERT A. TAFT, U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO, IN THE U.S. SENATE, JULY 11, 1949

"I believe that all nations must ultimately agree, if we are to have peace, to an international law defining the duties and obligations of such nations, particularly with reference to restraint from aggression and war. I believe there should be international courts to determine whether nations are abiding by that law, and I believe that there should be a joint armed force to enforce that law and the decisions of that court. I believe that in the end, the public opinion of the world will come to support the principle that nations like individuals are bound by law, and will insist that any nation which violates the law be promptly subjected to the joint action of nations guided by a determination to enforce the laws of peace.

"It is quite true that the United Nations Charter as drafted does not as yet reach the ideals of international peace and justice which I have described, but it goes a long way in that direction. It is defective principally because any one of the large nations can veto the action of the Security Council, and because there is not sufficient emphasis on law and justice as a guide to the action of the Security Council. But we have advised the President that prompt action should be taken to improve the charter. Senate Resolution 239, adopted by the Senate on May 19, 1948, contained three clauses proposing improvement in the United Nations Charter: First, a voluntary agreement to remove the veto from many questions; second, maximum efforts to obtain agreement for a United Nations armed force and the reduction of national armaments; and third, a review of the charter by a general conference called under article 109 of the charter."

Senator HUMPHREY. Our next witness is Mr. Robert Schutz. Before I call on Mr. Schutz, I shall enter into the record now the testimony of Mr. David C. Williams, director of research and education of the Americans for Democratic Action, Washington, D.C.

I shall say that I have known Mr. Williams for years, and I have a very high regard for him. We welcome the statement. (Mr. Williams' prepared statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF DAVID C. WILLIAMS, DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH AND EDUCATION, AMERICANS FOR DEMOCRATIC ACTION

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is David C. Williams, and I am appearing today on behalf of Americans for Democratic Action, as its director of research and education. Our organization appreciates this opportunity to testify before your committee in support of the establishment of the U.S. Disarmament Agency for World Peace and Security.

ADA has long urged the need for such an agency within our Government. We welcomed the establishment last year by President Eisenhower of the present Disarmament Administration within the State Department, although feeling that, in view of its limited scope and authority, it represented only a first step toward our goal. And our national convention, meeting in Washington on May 12-14 this year, reiterated our position, as follows:

"ADA supports the plan for a permanent national peace agency as recommended by the President and embodied in the Democratic platform, responsible